(Original post by gjd800)
I understand your point, I'm just not sure it's necessarily the case. Of course it is more straightforward to get a 'right' answer in maths and science exams, but I still hazard that the same factors come into play - good teaching, effective practice. The main thing in essay based subjects is that people don;t understand how to construct an effective argument. That can be taught.

Maybe the way they are marked at A-Level has something to do with it, too - I have just seen a thread on here where the person complains about harsh personal insults in the comments. Unthinkable at degree level. The thing you say about history also suggests a marking issue to me. The shifting of boundaries to preserve averages and so on is not a concern at degree level, either. We just don't do it.

Without blowing my own trumpet too hard, I didn't drop below an 80 in my final year at undergraduate and that was in an essay-based subject (philosophy). It's not that I am the greatest mind of a generation (not even the greatest mind in my house, actually), it's just that I know how to write a good essay. It can be taught.

It's a sad truth that a lot of teachers are still using "PEEL" at A Level.This basically caps your mark at grade B. Not to mention many tend to go about things in a structured, mechanistic order. The papers are also marked to make sure they meet the minimum things like the consideration of both arguments, comment about x, analysed the source in y manner etc. It's funny because different exam boards will have different interpretations and giving an A* essay on one exam board to an examiner on the other will probably result in a different grade.

Did you win a prize for that mark? idk what the typical top scoring marks are in a cohort for philosophy, but I'd imagine not getting below 80 puts you in the top 5% surely?

(Original post by Kyber Ninja)
It's a sad truth that a lot of teachers are still using "PEEL" at A Level.This basically caps your mark at grade B. Not to mention many tend to go about things in a structured, mechanistic order. The papers are also marked to make sure they meet the minimum things like the consideration of both arguments, comment about x, analysed the source in y manner etc. It's funny because different exam boards will have different interpretations and giving an A* essay on one exam board to an examiner on the other will probably result in a different grade.

Did you win a prize for that mark? idk what the typical top scoring marks are in a cohort for philosophy, but I'd imagine not getting below 80 puts you in the top 5% surely?

That is sad. And it's letting kids down, actually. Pfft.

Yeah, I won a couple. Parents were pleased but I was more bothered about using the small cash rewards to 'buy reading materials' to go get leathered instead

(Original post by Notoriety)
The premise of your argument is that A*AA for humanities is harder than A*AA for STEM. That is no doubt true, but it does not mean that A*AA for humanities is "hard". Thanks to John, we know the average successful Cambridge law applicant has 3.4 A* and .5 A. IB it is 44. But maybe all high-performing students are pushed towards Oxbridge and nevertheless for the whole (encompassing unsuccessful applicants) it is quite challenging to get A*AA.

For law, Oxbridge, LSE, UCL, KCL, Durham, now Bristol and formerly Notts are filled with A*AA+ students. Indeed, even some of the third tiers have significant numbers. Last year for Exeter Law, around a quarter of A-Level students enrolling had A*AA+. Exeter and Warwick have the highest average entry of the third tiers, but it is reasonable to think the likes of York and Leeds are similar. Even Liverpool has 9% enrolling with A*AA+! Plenty of people who do not go to Oxbridge manage it.

Plus the STEM vs humanities dichotomy is not relevant, as a good number of law students have partial or even predominant STEM backgrounds. Part of the reason is that law at degree-level is only a partially essay-based subject. Even for essay questions, the smoothness of your writing is immaterial. We are more "brunt-force" type writers, as evidenced by my writing style as opposed to gjd's!

Apart from Oxbridge, UCL and LSE, aren't the rest giving offers to most applicants who apply in the first place? In that instance, A*AA is probably harder to achieve than getting the offer itself? I'm surprised Nottingham isn't higher, given that it's one of the best unis in the world as confirmed by a previous thread Also, is A*A*B included in these stats given?

It's funny because the A*/A attainment rates are at their lowest ever, since the 1990s.

Liverpool is forever getting ****ed on this forum. Not to mention those 9% could've used UCAS adjustment to go to better law schools; clearly they don't care and good for them haha.

Yeah, I won a couple. Parents were pleased but I was more bothered about using the small cash rewards to 'buy reading materials' to go get leathered instead

I remember being told by a friend in the year above that the highest scoring chemical engineering graduate at Imperial got given £2,000 by some oil company and asked him to not forget the favour they did for him.

(Original post by Kyber Ninja)
I remember being told by a friend in the year above that the highest scoring chemical engineering graduate at Imperial got given £2,000 by some oil company and asked him to not forget the favour they did for him.

(Original post by Kyber Ninja)
Apart from Oxbridge, UCL and LSE, aren't the rest giving offers to most applicants who apply in the first place? In that instance, A*AA is probably harder to achieve than getting the offer itself? I'm surprised Nottingham isn't higher, given that it's one of the best unis in the world as confirmed by a previous thread Also, is A*A*B included in these stats given?

It's funny because the A*/A attainment rates are at their lowest ever, since the 1990s.

Liverpool is forever getting ****ed on this forum. Not to mention those 9% could've used UCAS adjustment to go to better law schools; clearly they don't care and good for them haha.

Shush, don't say that around gjd! You'll hurt his feelings. Liverpool is a very good uni!

I think the reason people go to Liverpool or Exeter with those grades is because of local ties or genuine interest in the city. Also the consideration of whether it is better to be someone who is exceptional at Liverpool or OK at UCL. There used to be a couple years ago a poster who quit Oxford a few weeks in, went to Bath, and left with an 80%. Now they're at a top-tier MC firm! Would they have similar success with a 65% from Oxford? You have to ask yourself that.

None of this is to do with the humanities vs STEM point. It is 3am and I am just rambling at this stage. KCL has as low an offer rate as UCL and LSE. Durham's is much higher, but still in the 60% range. Durham attracts a lot of weird people, maybe like the Bath and Liverpool lot, so you don't know the quality of students who are being rejected there. They could be very highly qualified indeed. Or Durham could simply know that a lot of people applying there would be putting LSE and Oxbridge as a firm, and to even getting close to fill their numbers, they need to give a host of very good students offers. Again rambling but there's a cogent point there somewhere.

(Original post by Notoriety)
Shush, don't say that around gjd! You'll hurt his feelings. Liverpool is a very good uni!

I think the reason people go to Liverpool or Exeter with those grades is because of local ties or genuine interest in the city. Also the consideration of whether it is better to be someone who is exceptional at Liverpool or OK at UCL. There used to be a couple years ago a poster who quit Oxford a few weeks in, went to Bath, and left with an 80%. Now they're at a top-tier MC firm! Would they have similar successful with a 65% from Oxford? You have to ask yourself that.

None of this is to do with the humanities vs STEM point. It is 3am and I am just rambling at this stage. KCL has as low an offer rate as UCL and LSE. Durham's is much higher, but still in the 60% range. Durham attracts a lot of weird people, maybe like the Bath and Liverpool lot, so you don't know the quality of students who are being rejected there. They could be very highly qualified indeed. Or Durham could simply know that a lot of people applying there would be putting LSE and Oxbridge as a firm, and to even getting close to fill their numbers, they need to give a host of very good students offers. Again rambling but there's a cogent point there somewhere.

gdj is good enough that he doesn't need his uni to back him, unlike so many people on this forum at times that use their grades/uni to justify an incorrect point. Subsequently, its okay for him to be liable to a bit of roasting.

Ah, so it does. Didn't expect that. Cant imagine how competitive these places are gonna get in a few decades.

I'm not arsed about opinions about the institutions - whatever they might be. It's the 16 year olds on here that have never set foot outside their 2 acre driveway banging on about how the city is a warzone that gets my back up, haha.

And congrats for seeing past the new name, and seeing the true me. Not everyone has been so perceptive, haha.

(Original post by gjd800)
I'm not arsed about opinions about the institutions - whatever they might be. It's the 16 year olds on here that have never set foot outside their 2 acre driveway banging on about how the city is a warzone that gets my back up, haha.

Liverpool is pretty dangerous. One time I was there on business and one of the yoofs spoke to me without addressing me as sir. I was horrified, of course. The only remedy was to throw my wallet and personal belongings to him and his compatriots, and hope they'd spare my life.

And congrats for seeing past the new name, and seeing the true me. Not everyone has been so perceptive, haha.

Liverpool is pretty dangerous. One time I was there on business and one of the yoofs spoke to me without addressing me as sir. I was horrified, of course. The only remedy was to throw my wallet and personal belongings to him and his compatriots, and hope they'd spare my life.

I routinely walk about unmolested, which is a great inconvenience when you'd like to be molested.

(Original post by Kyber Ninja)
Meh, there's been too many influentials from multiple unis for people to give a face value judgement of a person from there. Guess its just a consequence of correlation.

Here's hoping for distinction in the MA *fingers crossed emoji*

I guess. I don't really have an opinion on people's opinions of any universities, wherever and whatever they might be. I just don't care. Maybe that's a perspective that comes with age. What narks me most is people filling impressionable minds with *******s about how lawless my home city is. it's something I've put up with my entire life because every meff and his wife in the areas surrounding Liverpool have this weird fetishised fear of the place.

(Original post by Notoriety)
Aye, sometimes they will only molest me when I strongly beseech them to do so. And often they do it in such a way that it is not enjoyable for me, which again just demonstrates their lack of civility.